It might not be a regression, and so far i haven't been able to reproduce. Its seems to be related to suspend/resume interface up/down and mount/unmount. Also potentially with cifs waiting for a NAS to spinup to complete mount. On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 01:41:39 +0200 (CEST) > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report >> of recent regressions. >> >> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions >> from 2.6.34. Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team >> know (either way). >> >> >> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16306 >> Subject : 2.6.35-rc3 BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000048 cifs_show_options >> Submitter : Andrew Hendry <andrew.hendry@xxxxxxxxx> >> Date : 2010-06-26 10:46 (13 days old) >> Message-ID : <AANLkTilhTrEBYZd4HxeXQk8B6-yV8rCJ2C0jXsEREgIR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127754922110501&w=2 >> Handled-By : Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> > > Not sure if this is a new bug or not... > > I don't think this is really a CIFS bug, per-se. It seems like the > problem may be that the iterator for /proc/pid/mountinfo is not > sufficiently protected against removal from the vfsmount list. > > Filesystems don't seem to be expected to do any locking in their > show_options routines though so I'm guessing that something is borked > in the generic vfs layer. > > Either that or this is some sort of generic mem corruption? I'm open to > input from others that have a better grasp of this stuff at the VFS > layer... > > -- > Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
